From list-managers-owner Tue Jul 3 12:01:57 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA25289; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clifford.inch.com (clifford.inch.com [216.223.192.27])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3C8517E8C
for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from omar@localhost)
by clifford.inch.com (8.9.3/8.8.5) id OAA17345
for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:29:29 -0400
Message-ID: <20010703142929.B16376@clifford.inch.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:29:29 -0400
From: Omar Thameen
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: including "report abuse to..." in each message
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I'm trying to figure out a way to include some information on how to
report abuse on messages that go out on my lists. The issue I see is
that if you are the victim of a forced zubscribe to a list, it's either:
1) spam pretending to be a list, so the unzub address doesn't work or
simply confirms that your email address is valid, or
2) some annoying list owner that you would like to complain about.
I'm thinking of something like an "List-Complaints-To:" header, but was
wondering if any de facto standard has emerged. I've read rfc2369,
and didn't see anything quite on point.
Omar
[re-sent to avoid taboo filters]
From list-managers-owner Wed Jul 4 11:04:30 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA10104; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 10:55:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A1FB17EBF
for ; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 10:55:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130])
by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-24 #44856) with ESMTP id <0GFY00A6LN6OZY@eListX.com>
for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 04 Jul 2001 13:56:49 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 13:52:04 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
From: James M Galvin
Subject: Re: including "report abuse to..." in each message
In-reply-to: <20010703142929.B16376@clifford.inch.com>
X-X-Sender: galvin@pc.elistx.com
To: Omar Thameen
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Message-id:
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
WIth respect to RFC2369 I would think that abuse should be reported to
the List-Owner: or even the List-Help:, if those headers existed. I
suppose a clarification could be helpful but I don't think we need a new
header.
In any case, it's not immediately obvious to me how there would be a
problem in your scenario. If someone is pretending to be your list
neither your header/information nor any other "useful header" will
appear, i.e., there's no solution to the problem.
If someone manages to zubscribe someone else, aside from the fact that
you've got other problems, the zubscribed address is going to get
messages from your list and therefore the "unzubscribe" information in
it, whether in a header or a trailer, will be valid.
If the list owner is annoying, why would they want to put helpful
information that would get them in trouble? You're going to have to be
more resourceful and inspect Received: headers to find a site to
contact.
Jim
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Omar Thameen wrote:
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 14:29:29 -0400
From: Omar Thameen
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: including "report abuse to..." in each message
I'm trying to figure out a way to include some information on how to
report abuse on messages that go out on my lists. The issue I see is
that if you are the victim of a forced zubscribe to a list, it's either:
1) spam pretending to be a list, so the unzub address doesn't work or
simply confirms that your email address is valid, or
2) some annoying list owner that you would like to complain about.
I'm thinking of something like an "List-Complaints-To:" header, but was
wondering if any de facto standard has emerged. I've read rfc2369,
and didn't see anything quite on point.
Omar
[re-sent to avoid taboo filters]
From list-managers-owner Wed Jul 4 14:21:40 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id OAA11682; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 14:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clifford.inch.com (clifford.inch.com [216.223.192.27])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF5917E8C
for ; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 14:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from omar@localhost)
by clifford.inch.com (8.9.3/8.8.5) id QAA25284;
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 16:43:44 -0400
Message-ID: <20010704164343.B24816@clifford.inch.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 16:43:43 -0400
From: Omar Thameen
To: James M Galvin
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: including "report abuse to..." in each message
References: <20010703142929.B16376@clifford.inch.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i
In-Reply-To: ; from James M Galvin on Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 01:52:04PM -0400
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
The situation is one where we're hosting virtual lists. Without
being obvious about the fact that we're hosting the list, I'd
like recipients to know that they can contact us if there's any
abuse. We don't permit spam, and for the most part, it's not
a problem.
Nonetheless, if someone is mistakenly placed on a list (either due
to a misunderstanding or an overzealous list owner), I'd like the
recipient to know that they have recourse with us, rather than
having to complain to the upstream provider.
The problem is that from personal experience, I certainly don't trust
the abuse and postmaster addresses at domains from which I'm receiving
spam, and I wouldn't expect others to do so either.
Perhaps the best thing I can do is to put multiple URLs or mailto's
in the List-* headers so that the recipient can see our involvement.
Omar
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 01:52:04PM -0400, James M Galvin wrote:
>
> In any case, it's not immediately obvious to me how there would be a
> problem in your scenario. If someone is pretending to be your list
> neither your header/information nor any other "useful header" will
> appear, i.e., there's no solution to the problem.
>
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Omar Thameen wrote:
>
> I'm trying to figure out a way to include some information on how to
> report abuse on messages that go out on my lists. The issue I see is
> that if you are the victim of a forced zubscribe to a list, it's either:
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 5 07:50:31 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA23494; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 07:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dozer.liquidweb.com (unknown [216.74.111.64])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DFC517E8C
for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 07:36:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scadian by dozer.liquidweb.com with local (Exim 3.22 #1)
id 15IACo-0000EP-00; Thu, 05 Jul 2001 10:34:10 -0400
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 10:34:10 -0400
From: blaise@scadian.net
To: Omar Thameen
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: including "report abuse to..." in each message
Message-ID: <20010705103410.D2669@scadian.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Omar Thameen ,
list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
References: <20010703142929.B16376@clifford.inch.com> <20010704164343.B24816@clifford.inch.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <20010704164343.B24816@clifford.inch.com>; from omar@clifford.inch.com on Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 04:43:43PM -0400
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - dozer.liquidweb.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [32028 529] / [32028 529]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - dozer.liquidweb.com
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 04:43:43PM -0400, Omar Thameen wrote:
> The situation is one where we're hosting virtual lists. Without
> being obvious about the fact that we're hosting the list, I'd
> like recipients to know that they can contact us if there's any
> abuse. We don't permit spam, and for the most part, it's not
> a problem.
>
> Nonetheless, if someone is mistakenly placed on a list (either due
> to a misunderstanding or an overzealous list owner), I'd like the
> recipient to know that they have recourse with us, rather than
> having to complain to the upstream provider.
>
> The problem is that from personal experience, I certainly don't trust
> the abuse and postmaster addresses at domains from which I'm receiving
> spam, and I wouldn't expect others to do so either.
>
> Perhaps the best thing I can do is to put multiple URLs or mailto's
> in the List-* headers so that the recipient can see our involvement.
The way the web hosting service I use does it is to add X-Anti-Abuse:
headers. (They add them in all emails originated through their system,
not just list mails.)
Jim
--
Jim Trigg /"\
SKA Blaise de Cormeilles \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
Hostmaster X HELP CURE HTML MAIL
Academy of S. Gabriel / \
From list-managers-owner Fri Jul 6 03:51:31 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id DAA07109; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 03:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.circle.net (smtp.circle.net [209.95.64.26])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75D6317E8C
for ; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 03:38:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from s146.dhcp212-112.cybercable.fr ([212.198.112.146])
by smtp.circle.net with esmtp (Exim 2.10 #2)
id 15ISzs-00024D-00
for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 10:38:05 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: sharpword001@pop.sharp-words.com
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:
References:
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 12:35:51 +0200
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: David Sharp
Subject: Is Liszt only a fond memory?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I have in my archives a discussion from April 1999 on Topica taking over Liszt.
Since around then, requests sent to http://www.liszt.com/ have been
rerouted to http://www.topica.com/
Until recently I had maintained the "liszt" address on my links page
out of a mixture of nostalgia and wishful thinking, but also because
I thought that the Topica equivalent was still a genuine open list
index.
When I see the way the Topica page looks now, it seems to me that's
no longer clear.
It looks just like a commercial site for Topica's services, maybe
with a few "heritage" listings thrown in.
In particular, I don't see any obvious link asking people to add new
lists that aren't Topica products.
My question is : Does Topica remain an equivalent of the sadly deceased Liszt?
If not, is there another site which performs a similar function?
--
David Sharp, journalist(e), France
Site personnel / Personal home page http://www.sharp-words.com/
Site et forum / Press site & mailing list: http://www.presse-en-ligne.com/
From list-managers-owner Fri Jul 6 06:08:39 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA08553; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 05:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.vjs.org (mail.vjs.org [160.79.92.74])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C241217E8C
for ; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 05:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.250] (207.237.242.13) by mail.vjs.org with ESMTP
(Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.2); Fri, 6 Jul 2001 08:58:18 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:
References:
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 08:58:43 -0400
To: David Sharp , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Vince Sabio
Subject: Re: Is Liszt only a fond memory?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
** Sometime around 12:35 +0200 07/06/01, David Sharp sent everyone:
>I have in my archives a discussion from April 1999 on Topica taking
>over Liszt.
Purchasing, IIRC.
>Since around then, requests sent to http://www.liszt.com/ have been
>rerouted to http://www.topica.com/
>
>Until recently I had maintained the "liszt" address on my links page
>out of a mixture of nostalgia and wishful thinking, but also because
>I thought that the Topica equivalent was still a genuine open list
>index.
For the most part, it still is.
>When I see the way the Topica page looks now, it seems to me that's
>no longer clear.
>
>It looks just like a commercial site for Topica's services, maybe
>with a few "heritage" listings thrown in.
I believe that the entire Liszt database is still there.
>In particular, I don't see any obvious link asking people to add new
>lists that aren't Topica products.
It is somewhat buried:
>My question is : Does Topica remain an equivalent of the sadly deceased Liszt?
More of an augmentation; Liszt is a subset of Topica.
>If not, is there another site which performs a similar function?
I'm not familiar with any.
__________________________________________________________________________
Vince Sabio vince@vjs.org
From list-managers-owner Fri Jul 6 13:52:45 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA12530; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 13:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8DCD17E8B
for ; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 13:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130])
by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-24 #44856) with ESMTP id <0GG200MAX9JJ5C@eListX.com>
for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 06 Jul 2001 12:52:39 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 12:47:44 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
From: James M Galvin
Subject: Re: including "report abuse to..." in each message
In-reply-to: <20010704164343.B24816@clifford.inch.com>
X-X-Sender: galvin@pc.elistx.com
To: Omar Thameen
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Message-id:
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Here's what we do. It hides our involvement until we reply to a
message.
We (eList eXpress) host virtual domains for our customers in which they
put their lists. What's required is that the entire domain must be
routed through our server.
Since we resolve all addresses in the domain we put a postmaster,
webmaster, abuse, etc., in the domain and alias them to our main site.
This means the customer can not have "lists" with those names but it's
never been an issue.
For all lists we also manage the "-help" address for it. In the LIST-*
headers the List-Help is an email address that points to the "-help" for
the list. Whenever a new list is created that alias is also
automatically created. We also set the LIST-* headers; list owners can
not control or change them.
If necessary, when messages are received by the "-help" that require
action from the list owner we forward it. Otherwise we deal with it.
We've had a few abuse scares but nothing serious and nothing that was
not quickly dealt with because we get the "-help" list mail and the
postmaster, abuse, etc. mail for the domain.
Jim
On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Omar Thameen wrote:
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 16:43:43 -0400
From: Omar Thameen
To: James M Galvin
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: including "report abuse to..." in each message
The situation is one where we're hosting virtual lists. Without
being obvious about the fact that we're hosting the list, I'd
like recipients to know that they can contact us if there's any
abuse. We don't permit spam, and for the most part, it's not
a problem.
Nonetheless, if someone is mistakenly placed on a list (either due
to a misunderstanding or an overzealous list owner), I'd like the
recipient to know that they have recourse with us, rather than
having to complain to the upstream provider.
The problem is that from personal experience, I certainly don't trust
the abuse and postmaster addresses at domains from which I'm receiving
spam, and I wouldn't expect others to do so either.
Perhaps the best thing I can do is to put multiple URLs or mailto's
in the List-* headers so that the recipient can see our involvement.
Omar
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 01:52:04PM -0400, James M Galvin wrote:
>
> In any case, it's not immediately obvious to me how there would be a
> problem in your scenario. If someone is pretending to be your list
> neither your header/information nor any other "useful header" will
> appear, i.e., there's no solution to the problem.
>
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Omar Thameen wrote:
>
> I'm trying to figure out a way to include some information on how to
> report abuse on messages that go out on my lists. The issue I see is
> that if you are the victim of a forced zubscribe to a list, it's either:
From list-managers-owner Sun Jul 8 11:20:25 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id LAA09460; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 11:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from green.syncronym.org (green.syncronym.org [216.118.17.6])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C5FA817E8B
for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 11:07:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 52504 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 18:07:55 -0000
Received: from citadel.in.taronga.com (10.0.0.43)
by green.in.taronga.com with SMTP; 8 Jul 2001 18:07:55 -0000
Received: by citadel.in.taronga.com (Postfix, from userid 101)
id 5006D41437; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 13:07:55 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Spammed by a Mailing List Portal
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 13:07:55 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20010708180755.5006D41437@citadel.in.taronga.com>
From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
New ezine list service makes the mistake of advertising by spamming.
And they used Lyris to do it. Reading further, I see that this was
done by Jayde. I've been spammed by Jayde before.
I like the disclaimer, though. This is a one time mailing, there's
no need to uns*b. But if you do wish to uns*b, etc, etc.
I'm off to read their privacy policy...
X-Mailer: Lyris Web Interface
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 13:40:51 -0400
Subject: [EzineHub] Submit Your Newsletter!
To: arielle@taronga.com
From: EzineHub
List-Uns*bscribe:
Reply-To: l*ave-ezinehub-2305326Q@hercules.ezinehub.com
================================================================
** EzineHub Invitation To Newsletter Publishers **
The Newsletter Search Engine & Resource Site
http://www.ezinehub.com
================================================================
Dear Ezine Editor:
This message is intended for ezine publishers only. If you
do not publish an ezine, or if this message reached you at
more than one email address, please accept our apologies and
inform us of any errors so that we may update our address
information.
We invite you to submit your newsletter to EzineHub, a free
ezine directory and search engine that offers publishers the
following:
1. Free newsletter listings.
2. Free s*bscribers to your ezine should anyone choose to s*bscribe.
3. Advertisers for your ezine if it is sponsor supported.
To add your ezine, please go to:
http://www.ezinehub.com/add.html
For information regarding how we handle s*bscribers, how to
edit your submissions, advertiser queries etc., go to:
http://www.ezinehub.com/faq.html
Thanks!
--
Mel Strocen
President, Jayde Online, Inc.
info@ezinehub.com
PS. If you encounter a problem in adding your newsletter
to EzineHub, please contact support@ezinehub.com
================================================================
How To Uns*bscribe
You are currently s*bscribed as: ** arielle@taronga.com **
This is a one-time mailing so there is no need to uns*bscribe,
but if you choose to do so, you can use one of the following
2 simple methods:
1. Click the Reply button in your email program and
send this message back to us.
2. Click the email uns*bscribe link below and send:
mailto:l*ave-ezinehub-2305326Q@hercules.ezinehub.com
================================================================
Visit SiteProNews < http://www.sitepronews.com >, a one-stop
resource site for webmasters with daily tips, apps, sites of
the day, free ebooks and articles by noted web experts.
================================================================
From list-managers-owner Sun Jul 8 12:50:33 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id MAA10205; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 12:45:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D80117E8B
for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 12:45:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from dattier@localhost)
by ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id f68JjVD27022
for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 14:45:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: "David W. Tamkin"
Message-Id: <200107081945.f68JjVD27022@ripco.com>
Subject: "This is a one-time mailing" (was Spammed by a Mailing List Portal)
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 14:45:30 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To: <20010708180755.5006D41437@citadel.in.taronga.com> from "Stephanie da Silva" at Jul 08, 2001 01:07:55 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Stephanie da Silva wrote about some spam she received,
| I like the disclaimer, though. This is a one time mailing, there's
| no need to uns*b. But if you do wish to uns*b, etc, etc.
It's bad enough without the direct contradiction. When something says "this
is a one-time mailing, no need to uns*b," and it really *is* a one-time mail-
ing and you really *won't* hear any more about it if you don't respond, you
still have no way to get off the list where the sender found your address so
that you don't get any more spam from others who buy or rent it; plus, the
same sender is going to come up with another reason -- a different, or suppo-
sedly different, product or service -- and want to tell the whole world a-
gain, including those who showed no interest in the previous offering.
From list-managers-owner Sun Jul 8 13:35:25 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA10596; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 13:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from green.syncronym.org (green.syncronym.org [216.118.17.6])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 77F7517E8B
for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 13:26:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 59352 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 20:26:46 -0000
Received: from citadel.in.taronga.com (10.0.0.43)
by green.in.taronga.com with SMTP; 8 Jul 2001 20:26:46 -0000
Received: by citadel.in.taronga.com (Postfix, from userid 101)
id 62B444143C; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 15:26:46 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: "This is a one-time mailing" (was Spammed by a Mailing List Portal)
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 15:26:46 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20010708202646.62B444143C@citadel.in.taronga.com>
From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> that you don't get any more spam from others who buy or rent it; plus, the
> same sender is going to come up with another reason -- a different, or suppo-
> sedly different, product or service -- and want to tell the whole world a-
> gain, including those who showed no interest in the previous offering.
No doubt, like I said, I've been spammed by Jayde before, repeatedly.
Went and looked up their privacy policy. They don't have one.
What they do say is this:
Other than EzineHub staff, only advertisers who are seriously
interested (translate this as willing to pay for the
information) in newsletter advertising, will be able to
access database details for ad rates, list size, contact
details, etc.
If for some reason, you do not want advertisers to have
this information, Do Not submit your newsletter to this
directory.
From list-managers-owner Sun Jul 8 15:35:32 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA11577; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 15:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns.oldradio.net (ns.oldradio.net [216.87.208.245])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5F1B17E8B
for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 15:27:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [208.165.37.214] (ip214.37.blaz.blazenet.net [208.165.37.214])
by ns.oldradio.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA18020;
Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:27:31 -0400
X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com
X-Envelope-To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <20010708202646.62B444143C@citadel.in.taronga.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:20:13 -0400
To: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Charlie Summers
Subject: Re:"This is a one-time mailing" (was Spammed by a Mailing List
Portal)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 4:26 PM -0400 7/8/01, Stephanie da Silva is rumored to have typed:
> No doubt, like I said, I've been spammed by Jayde before, repeatedly.
>
> Went and looked up their privacy policy. They don't have one.
> What they do say is this:
I wouldn't waste the time worrying about it; report it to the upstreams
and be done with it. (We got hammered so badly by Jayde that we locked out a
couple of C blocks from SMTP connections. Morons...)
Charlie
From list-managers-owner Sun Jul 8 16:36:44 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA12073; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 16:23:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from host4.ctc.net (host4.mail.vnet.net [166.82.1.69])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D907017E8B
for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 16:23:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from katie.vnet.net ([166.82.1.7]) by host4.ctc.net
(InterMail vK.4.03.04.01 201-232-130-101 license faff3b528a5ab935d6363ebfb2fac093)
with ESMTP id <20010708232342.IXWJ7448.host4@katie.vnet.net>
for ;
Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:23:42 -0400
Received: from localhost (murr@localhost)
by katie.vnet.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA07930
for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:23:39 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:23:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: murr rhame
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: "This is a one-time mailing" (was Spammed by a Mailing List
Portal)
In-Reply-To: <200107081945.f68JjVD27022@ripco.com>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, David W. Tamkin wrote:
> It's bad enough without the direct contradiction. When
> something says "this is a one-time mailing, no need to
> uns*b," and it really *is* a one-time mail- ing and you
> really *won't* hear any more about it if you don't respond,
> you still have no way to get off the list where the sender
> found your address so that you don't get any more spam from
> others who buy or rent it; plus, the same sender is going to
> come up with another reason -- a different, or suppo- sedly
> different, product or service -- and want to tell the whole
> world a- gain, including those who showed no interest in the
> previous offering.
Didn't someone test several "remove me" addresses and find that
these were being used to verify live addresses for more spamming?
They MIGHT remove you from their own spam list while selling your
now-confirmed address to dozens of other lists as a "premium
quality, know to be good" address... We've got a live one here.
Let 'em have it. ;-)
- murr -
From list-managers-owner Mon Jul 9 09:35:31 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA24519; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:30:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sendmail.cisto.org (tarsus.cisto.org [151.196.211.15])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8014217E8E
for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:30:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from quill.local (pop-be-6-2-dialup-198.freesurf.ch [194.230.177.198])
by sendmail.cisto.org (8.9.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA11605
for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:31:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from norbert@localhost)
by quill.local (8.11.2/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) id f69G8jH12326;
Mon, 9 Jul 2001 18:08:45 +0200
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 18:08:45 +0200
Message-Id: <200107091608.f69G8jH12326@quill.local>
From: Norbert Bollow
Prefer-Language: de, en, fr
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: NEED: Explanation of SMTP for list-owners
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Can someone recommend a website (or other text) which explains
everything that list-owners need to know about SMTP? (E.g. the
difference of envelope sender and From: header, what happens in
forwarding, how to read Received: headers.)
Greetings, Norbert.
--
Norbert Bollow, Weidlistr.18, CH-8624 Gruet (near Zurich, Switzerland)
Your own domain with all your Mailman lists: $15/month http://cisto.com
Business Coaching for Internet Entrepreneurs ---> http://thinkcoach.com
Tel +41 1 972 20 59 Fax +41 1 972 20 69 nb@freedevelopers.net
From list-managers-owner Mon Jul 9 21:49:12 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA01779; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:35:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.12])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D6CB17EB3
for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from veld.com (pool-63.49.86.43.tmpa.grid.net [63.49.86.43])
by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA05097
for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:34:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3B4A85D9.1D9E246@veld.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 00:34:33 -0400
From: Philip Busey
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: NEED: Explanation of SMTP for list-owners
References: <200107091608.f69G8jH12326@quill.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Norbert,
David Wood 1999. Programming Internet Mail. 1999. O'Reilly.
has ten pages on headers and much other useful information.
Phil
http://earthfire.com
Norbert Bollow wrote:
>
> Can someone recommend a website (or other text) which explains
> everything that list-owners need to know about SMTP? (E.g. the
> difference of envelope sender and From: header, what happens in
> forwarding, how to read Received: headers.)
>
> Greetings, Norbert.
From list-managers-owner Tue Jul 10 05:50:34 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA08824; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 05:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.rev.net (server02.rev.net [206.67.68.98])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D9FB17ED1
for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 05:35:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fantasy ([65.164.103.113])
by mail.rev.net (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f6ACZPI01015
for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:35:26 -0400
Message-Id: <200107101235.f6ACZPI01015@mail.rev.net>
From: "Bernie Cosell"
Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:35:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: NEED: Explanation of SMTP for list-owners
In-reply-to: <200107091608.f69G8jH12326@quill.local>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
X-Archived: msg.994768525.Jq68T8@server02.rev.net
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On 9 Jul 2001, at 18:08, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Can someone recommend a website (or other text) which explains
> everything that list-owners need to know about SMTP? (E.g. the
> difference of envelope sender and From: header, what happens in
> forwarding, how to read Received: headers.)
Well, One thing I can recommend/suggest is that you try reading the
actual specifications. The two key RFCs that govern all of this are RFCs
821 and 822. They've recently been revised [although the new ones aren't
official yet, are they?] as RFCs 2821 and 2822. They're all quite
readably-written [esp the new, revised versions], aren't all that long,
and I don't think they're all that hard to understand. NOTE: don't
bother too much, other than in spots where you're curious, with all the
BNF and grammar rules. Focus on all of the running expository text and
just sort out the grammar stuff when you need a detail [and even then it
is easy.
For example, I was recently wondering if the message-Id field in an email
message is required or not [I was pretty sure it was not, but I couldn't
remember for-sure]. so I hopped over to RFC 822 and easily found:
optional-field =
/ "Message-ID" ":" msg-id
/ "Resent-Message-ID" ":" msg-id
/ "In-Reply-To" ":" *(phrase / msg-id)
/ "References" ":" *(phrase / msg-id)
/ "Keywords" ":" #phrase
/ "Subject" ":" *text
[...]
and even if you're not a real grammar-whiz, it is pretty clear [i think]
that "Message-ID" is one of the "optional-field"s. [as is 'Subject,
although many folk don't know that].
821/2821 is the SMTP spec. It is the machinery that moves mail from one
place to another and is the definition of the 'envelope' machinery. As
you will see, it uses *NOTHING* of the 'letter' [822] content of the
message for its handling.
822/2822 is the Mail-format spec. It defines what's what with the letter
that goes _in_ the envelope.
For another example, you mentioned the 'Received' field.. since that's
part of the message, again you go to 822 and you again easily find:
4.3.2. RECEIVED
A copy of this field is added by each transport service that
relays the message. The information in the field can be quite
useful for tracing transport problems.
The names of the sending and receiving hosts and time-of-
receipt may be specified. ....
Anyhow, I'm sure there are books and such that talk about this stuff, but
I've always found it most direct and best just to go to the 'horse's
mouth' for 821/822...
/bernie\
/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 07:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from quill.local (pop-ls-8-4-1-dialup-125.freesurf.ch [194.230.250.125])
by sendmail.cisto.org (8.9.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA13345;
Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:38:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from norbert@localhost)
by quill.local (8.11.2/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) id f6AEWij21942;
Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:32:44 +0200
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:32:44 +0200
Message-Id: <200107101432.f6AEWij21942@quill.local>
From: Norbert Bollow
Prefer-Language: de, en, fr
To: bernie@fantasyfarm.com
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-reply-to: <200107101235.f6ACZPI01015@mail.rev.net> (bernie@fantasyfarm.com)
Subject: Re: NEED: Explanation of SMTP for list-owners
References: <200107101235.f6ACZPI01015@mail.rev.net>
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> On 9 Jul 2001, at 18:08, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>
> > Can someone recommend a website (or other text) which explains
> > everything that list-owners need to know about SMTP? (E.g. the
> > difference of envelope sender and From: header, what happens in
> > forwarding, how to read Received: headers.)
>
> Well, One thing I can recommend/suggest is that you try reading the
> actual specifications.
Maybe I should have mentioned that I'm very familar with them
(and I've contributed a little to RFC2821, too :-)... I'm
looking for something simpler, a suitable introduction for
list-owners who may not be comfortable with such very technical
documents.
Dave Sill pointed me to his post
http://lists.omnipotent.net/qmail/200004/msg00366.html
which is a good starting point. Maybe I will write up something
myself, using Dave's article as inspiration.
Greetings, Norbert.
--
Norbert Bollow, Weidlistr.18, CH-8624 Gruet (near Zurich, Switzerland)
Your own domain with all your Mailman lists: $15/month http://cisto.com
Business Coaching for Internet Entrepreneurs ---> http://thinkcoach.com
Tel +41 1 972 20 59 Fax +41 1 972 20 69 nb@freedevelopers.net
From list-managers-owner Tue Jul 10 10:37:29 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA11495; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:25:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 830F817E8E
for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [165.227.249.20] (ip20.proper.com [165.227.249.20])
by above.proper.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f6AHPMm27106;
Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:25:22 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <200107101235.f6ACZPI01015@mail.rev.net>
References: <200107101235.f6ACZPI01015@mail.rev.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:15:37 -0700
To: "Bernie Cosell" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Paul Hoffman / IMC
Subject: Re: NEED: Explanation of SMTP for list-owners
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 8:35 AM -0400 7/10/01, Bernie Cosell wrote:
>Well, One thing I can recommend/suggest is that you try reading the
>actual specifications. The two key RFCs that govern all of this are RFCs
>821 and 822. They've recently been revised [although the new ones aren't
>official yet, are they?] as RFCs 2821 and 2822.
Yes, they are official now.
> They're all quite
>readably-written [esp the new, revised versions], aren't all that long,
>and I don't think they're all that hard to understand.
The target audience is mail list owners. I don't think the material
in 2821/2822 is easy to read for most of them.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 12 08:34:49 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id IAA11364; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:28:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bricks.mailback.com (bricks.mailback.com [204.245.195.18])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF7A717E8C
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:27:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BYRON4100.databack.com ([216.36.60.164])
by bricks.mailback.com (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2
release (PO203-101c) ID# 0-39841U2500L250S0) with ESMTP
id AAA20477 for ;
Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:27:54 -0700
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010712082745.02a4ac10@204.245.195.18>
X-Sender: bklunz@204.245.195.18
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:27:51 -0700
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
From: Byron Lunz
Subject: Re: Notice of impending blkhole listing of 204.245.195.17/32
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
We received the notice below two days ago. It came from, and requires
response to, gacracker.org which is a remailer. It gives no information as
to who is actually behind it. A message sent to their autoresponder address
was never answered. Mail sent to the specified "inquiry" address produced
the second message (below) which contains some unrealistic demands.
Does anyone here have any idea who's behind this?
(The specific ID numbers they assigned to us have been munged.)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 11 Jul 2001 02:59:53 -0000
From: Nobody
To: postmaster@mh.databack.com, postmaster@mh.databack.com
Cc: mlnotice+4b3ee4825100f9af@redneck.gacracker.org
Subject: Notice of impending blkhole listing of 204.245.195.17/32
Unless mail is sent to:
mlinquire+4b3ee483921800f9af@redneck.gacracker.org
and is received within 24 hours, the IP address and/or network
204.245.195.17/32 will be added to the DNS blackhole list of IPs that are
improperly operating mailing lists. You should receive a reply to
that message.
THIS LISTING MAY BE EXPANDED TO INCLUDE AN ENTIRE CLASS C NETWORK
WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE, upon receipt of additional UCE/UBE from
within that net-block.
To get information describing what this is about, please respond to
the above address, and pointers to the available information will be
provided in the reply. If you're uncomfortable sending mail from
your own account, we'd suggest using one of the free services
(hotmail or yahoo) to send the reply instead.
An attempt has been made to send this message to the
and addresses. c.f. RFC 1173
RDNS is the domain name associated with the IP address/net.
Be sure to write down this code:
4b3ee483921800f9af
You will need it if you want to be conditionally removed from the
list. If you lose it, there is no way to recover it. The token is
unique and will allow manipulation of this issue only by somebody
that knows or has access to the token.
Regards,
mlinquire+4b3ee483921800f9af@redneck.gacracker.org
--------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------
Response from our initial inquiry:
Congratulations. You've received a one-time extension of your listing date.
Status as of Wed Jul 11 16:17:21 2001: GMT
IP|Network: 204.245.195.17/32
State: To be listed
Time Stamp: Wed Jul 25 02:52:18 2001 GMT
This service maintains a list of IP addresses that are, in some way,
associated with mailing lists that are, in the opinion of the list
maintainer, not following the 'best practices' of operating mailing
lists.
You end up on this list by not confirming email addresses, either
now or in the past, before sending mail to those addresses. IPs are
added to this list by a semi-automated process. Please send mail to
mlfaq@redneck.gacracker.org for more details.
Send mail to:
mlinquire@redneck.gacracker.org
with a subject of:
Subject: Status
to obtain the status of an IP address.
E.g. to find out the status of IP #1.2.3.4, you use:
Subject: Status 1.2.3.4
Send mail to:
mlretest+@redneck.gacracker.org
to signify that all mailing lists associated with a given IP/Network
have been converted to use a closed-loop confirmed address
verification system, and that all addresses have been reconfirmed.
This will cause the IP/Network in question to be taken off of the
list, subject to DNS propagation. Any further messages sent to the
subscription test addresses after this point will cause a permanent
listing to be made. In other words, you only get one chance to get
it right, so test well before using this option.
Although this list is not affiliated with the Mail Abuse Prevention
System(MAPS), the list operator does agree with the principles
articulated at:
http://mail-abuse.org/manage.html
The focus of this list is that a closed-loop confirmation system
must be used to obtain the permission of the actual owner of an
email address before it can be added to *any* mailing list.
Candidate IPs and mailing lists are found when mailing lists are
started to addresses for which a closed-loop process was not used.
Candidate IPs are generally programmatically tested, and mailing
lists that fail to conform will have the IPs that are associated
with them added to this list. This includes addresses that are
obtained from 'partners' or by other means.
Mailing lists that are sent to non-existent addresses within a
domain are also subject to listing.
Mailing lists that have always followed this practice will not
appear on this list. Mailing lists that are using addresses that
were not obtained by this process are subject to listing.
To request a copy of the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), please
send mail to:
mlfaq@redneck.gacracker.org
Regards,
mlinquire@redneck.gacracker.org
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 12 10:04:46 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id JAA12124; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:58:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts5.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.25])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA8417E8C
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from b8q7201 ([64.230.82.156]) by tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net
(InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP
id <20010712165805.OBAN17517.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@b8q7201>;
Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:58:05 -0400
X-Sender: sharonlh@go.listdelivery.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:57:18 -0400
To: Byron Lunz
From: Sharon Tucci
Subject: Re: Notice of impending blkhole listing of 204.245.195.17/32
Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010712082745.02a4ac10@204.245.195.18>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <20010712165805.OBAN17517.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@b8q7201>
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 08:27 AM 7/12/01 -0700, Byron Lunz wrote:
>We received the notice below two days ago. It came from, and requires
>response to, gacracker.org which is a remailer. It gives no information as
>to who is actually behind it. A message sent to their autoresponder address
>was never answered. Mail sent to the specified "inquiry" address produced
>the second message (below) which contains some unrealistic demands.
>
>Does anyone here have any idea who's behind this?
>
>(The specific ID numbers they assigned to us have been munged.)
I had attempted to post a similar inquiry to this list a couple
months ago, but I guess the list server was down at the time.
We've received these notices too. No response after many attempts.
If you retrieved the FAQ's, it seems to be a list being compiled
for list servers that do not require double opt-in.
My own research has come up with zilch as far as who is behind
it and the purpose of it. I'd be interested if someone else on
this list can share any info on this.
Regards,
Sharon Tucci
http://www.ListHost.net
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 12 10:19:42 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id KAA12328; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tcp.com (tcp.com [216.15.66.33])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83BBC17E8C
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (jlick@localhost) by tcp.com (8.9.0/8.6.10) with ESMTP id KAA06556; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:13:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 01:13:17 +0800 (CST)
From: James Lick
To: Byron Lunz
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Notice of impending blkhole listing of 204.245.195.17/32
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010712082745.02a4ac10@204.245.195.18>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Byron Lunz wrote:
> Does anyone here have any idea who's behind this?
No, the person running it has decided to remain anonymous to avoid some of
the litigation surrounding other mail blackhole lists have experienced.
Others have tried to get this person to identify him/herself without
success.
> You end up on this list by not confirming email addresses, either
> now or in the past, before sending mail to those addresses. IPs are
> added to this list by a semi-automated process. Please send mail to
> mlfaq@redneck.gacracker.org for more details.
The purpose of this blackhole list is to block mailing lists servers with
lists that do not require confirmation to subscribe. However the current
methodology and attitude of the maintainer has not been very well received
in the anti-spam community, so I'm not sure if a lot of people are using
it. If you do have non-confirm mailing lists, now might be a good time to
move to confirmation though, as non-confirm mailing lists may be as
unacceptable as open relays are now within the next couple of years.
---- James Lick ---- jlick@drivel.com ---- http://drivel.com/ ----
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 12 13:19:46 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id NAA14135; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 13:12:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell7.ba.best.com (shell7.ba.best.com [206.184.139.138])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FF5D17E8B
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 13:12:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from cnorman@localhost)
by shell7.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.sh) id NAA07737;
Thu, 12 Jul 2001 13:12:25 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 13:12:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200107122012.NAA07737@shell7.ba.best.com>
From: Cyndi Norman
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Cc: cnorman@best.com
Subject: Earthlink Problems
Reply-To: cnorman@best.com
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I'm wondering if any of you are having problems with Earthlink these days.
They suddenly put a block on all mail from the server that runs my mailing
lists. This is a private server (colo) run by a friend. There is zero
spam from that server but some places have it banned because of some
technicalities that I believe have now been fixed.
Anyway, a couple days ago all posts to Earthlink customers started
bouncing. Both I and my friend have written Earthlink. They did not
respond to me and they won't answer him either. I'm not sure if they
answered him once or if he got an automated response but they said the
reasons for the block are x, y, or z and none of those apply to him. The
best he could figure was there was a clerical error.
It seems to affect Mindspring as well and now Netcom and others (I believe
they're all owned by Earthlink).
I wrote all my subscribers from Earthlink to tell them what is going on and
to urge them to complain about this. Appearently, Earthlink is having some
server problems so it's unclear what is going on. The subscribers who have
tried have not had any luck. Once can't get through and the other was told
that no incoming mail is blocked except for rare cases involving viruses.
Is there anyone here who works for Earthlink or who has a direct line to
someone who does? Or someone who can help us figure out what's going on?
I'd appreciate it, thanks.
Cyndi
Here is a copy of one of the bounce messages (I've deleted subscriber
addresses):
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to mx01.ix.netcom.com.:
>>> MAIL From: SIZE=41621
<<< 550-Earthlink/Netcom mail servers are unable to deliver this e-mail.
<<< 550-Please contact your Internet Service Provider to find out how
<<< 550-to send e-mail using the proper SMTP server. If you are a
<<< 550-MindSpring/Netcom customer, and need assistance configuring your e-mail
<<< 550-software, please contact MindSpring Technical Support at the
<<< 550 telephone number listed in your documentation.
554 [several address from ix.netcom.com]... Service unavailable
... while talking to mx06.mindspring.com.:
>>> MAIL From: SIZE=41621
<<< 550 Dialups/open relays blocked. Contact
554 [several address from mindspring.com]... Service unavailable
... while talking to mx06.pipeline.com.:
>>> MAIL From: SIZE=41621
<<< 550 Dialups/open relays blocked. Contact
554 [address from pipeline.com]... Service unavailable
... while talking to mx00.earthlink.net.:
>>> MAIL From: SIZE=41621
<<< 550-EarthLink's inbound mail servers do not allow mail from your site.
<<< 550-Please contact your ISP to find out how to send e-mail using a
<<< 550-proper mail server. If you are an EarthLink customer, and need
<<< 550-assistance configuring your e-mail software, please contact
<<< 550-EarthLink's technical support department at 1-800-EARTHLINK.
<<< 550-Server administrators that feel they are being blocked in error
<<< 550 may send e-mail to OpenRelay@Corp.EarthLink.Net for assistance.
554 [several address from earthlink.net]... Service unavailable
Return-Path:
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by ns1.peterbenjamin.com (8.8.8/8.8.7) id MAA08010
for immune-digest-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
(envelope-from owner-immune@peterbenjamin.com)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200107121938.MAA08010@ns1.peterbenjamin.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: ns1.peterbenjamin.com: majordom set sender to owner-immune@peterbenjamin.com using -f
From: owner-immune@peterbenjamin.com ([Immune Digest])
To: immune-digest@peterbenjamin.com
Subject: [Immune Digest] V2 #201
Reply-To: immune@immuneweb.org
Sender: owner-immune@peterbenjamin.com
Errors-To: owner-immune@peterbenjamin.com
Precedence: bulk
------- End of forwarded message -------
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 12 16:12:30 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id PAA15473; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 15:53:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tomts6-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts6.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.26])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D4AB17E8B
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 15:53:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from b8q7201 ([64.230.82.156]) by tomts6-srv.bellnexxia.net
(InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP
id <20010712225352.HTHM15384.tomts6-srv.bellnexxia.net@b8q7201>;
Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:53:52 -0400
X-Sender: sharonlh@go.listdelivery.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:01:37 -0400
To: James Lick
From: Sharon Tucci
Subject: Re: Notice of impending blkhole listing of 204.245.195.17/32
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To:
References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010712082745.02a4ac10@204.245.195.18>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <20010712225352.HTHM15384.tomts6-srv.bellnexxia.net@b8q7201>
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 01:13 AM 7/13/01 +0800, James Lick wrote:
>If you do have non-confirm mailing lists, now might be a good time to
>move to confirmation though, as non-confirm mailing lists may be as
>unacceptable as open relays are now within the next couple of years.
Thanks for explaining all of this James.
I do have a concern about your last comment --- this is what I have
been hearing for the past few years now. Personally, I think that
if a provider has good policies in place, the risks are quite minimal
for potential abuse. We have had one complaint that would not have
occured if we required double opt in - and we now provide delivery to
an estimated 13.5 million email addresses. (We do require that
clients using our service who do not use double opt in have a welcome
message generated automatically upon subscription.)
We have worked with clients on all different levels to try and
improve the response rates using double opt-in. Without fail, no
matter what measures are taken, what wording of instructions, what
methods of confirming their subscription, we've seen an average of
25% of consumer oriented lists not get confirmed, 30% for non-tech
business and 15-20% for tech and business. That's a significant
portion of subscribers to lose.
I think in cases of purely commercial lists (i.e. opt-in lists
as opposed to newsletters and discussion lists) or where a third
party is generating subscribers, double opt-in is warranted. But
outside of that, we hear more complaints from end users for the
lists that we host. We get anywhere from 1-5 people a week who
call or email us about lists they are having "difficulty" confirming
subscriptions to and questioning what a "stupid" procedure it is.
Most months, this is 4 to 20 times the number of spam complaints
we get :)
Sharon Tucci
http://www.ListHost.net
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 12 17:04:53 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA15985; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:50:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D699517E8B
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [209.239.169.205] (a205.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.205])
by plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f6CNewf16359;
Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:40:58 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:49:44 -0700
Subject: Re: Notice of impending blkhole listing of 204.245.195.17/32
From: Chuq Von Rospach
To: Sharon Tucci , James Lick
Cc:
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <20010712225352.HTHM15384.tomts6-srv.bellnexxia.net@b8q7201>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On 7/12/01 3:01 PM, "Sharon Tucci" wrote:
> At 01:13 AM 7/13/01 +0800, James Lick wrote:
>
>> If you do have non-confirm mailing lists, now might be a good time to
>> move to confirmation though, as non-confirm mailing lists may be as
>> unacceptable as open relays are now within the next couple of years.
>
>
> Thanks for explaining all of this James.
>
> I do have a concern about your last comment --- this is what I have
> been hearing for the past few years now.
And it's not closer to happening. I think the reality is, there's a small
group of people who feel that way, but there's very little support for it
out there. I think the people trying to define "one true way" to run mail
lists are well-meaning but misguided, but given previous arguments on this
list, I hesitate to start that one again, even by accident.
Given that the big mailing list systems have more or less standardized on
other systems, anyone who attempts to force the mailback validation will
find it quite difficult at this point. That horse has left the barn, and
trying to stuff it back in will be a hard fight against people with lots of
lawyers and large numbers of happy subscribers to use as evidence it's not
necessary.
> But
> outside of that, we hear more complaints from end users for the
> lists that we host. We get anywhere from 1-5 people a week who
> call or email us about lists they are having "difficulty" confirming
> subscriptions to and questioning what a "stupid" procedure it is.
> Most months, this is 4 to 20 times the number of spam complaints
> we get :)
My experience as well.
There is no single "right" way to do these things. It depends on the
content, the system, and the audience. What IS important is that it's
well-designed and runs properly, not that it does things any one way.
I used to worry about this happening. I'm now convinced it's very unlikely
to ever be mounted seriously. There'll always be people trying to make it
happen, but I think as long as the system is designed right and the staff is
responsive to requests and problems, that's a lot more important than
holding to any specific ideology on these operations.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome
[ = = ]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Q: Did God really create the world in seven days?
A: He did it in six days and nights while living on cola and candy
bars. On the seventh day he went home and found out his girlfriend
had left him.
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 12 17:19:48 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id QAA16001; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DB7117E8B
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [209.239.169.205] (a205.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.205])
by plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f6CNiNf16408
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:44:23 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:53:09 -0700
Subject: FW: IMPORTANT!!! ORBS USERS PLEASE TAKE NOTE
From: Chuq Von Rospach
To:
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I haven't seen this on this list, so I'm forwarding it FYI.
Ronald and I have disagreed in the past, but I love his solution to this
problem... But doesn't this really point out the general problem of allowing
an outside entity to define your mail acceptance policy when that outside
group gives you no visibility into what it's actually doing and how it makes
decisions? While this is ORBS specific, I feel the same is still true of
MAPS: it's a black box that people using its databases are told to just
trust that it's doing okay; but there's no way to audit it's operations, so
how do you know?
And even if it is working okay and being manaaged well, what guarantees do
you have that it won't blow up like ORBS did. Can you really trust your
e-mail to a system with so few checks and balances between MAPS and its user
community?
------ Forwarded Message
From: jseymour@LinxNet.com (Jim Seymour)
Reply-To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:07:44 -0400 (EDT)
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: FW: IMPORTANT!!! ORBS USERS PLEASE TAKE NOTE
Forwarded from a post to news.admin.net-abuse.email...
----- Begin Included Message -----
From: rfg@monkeys.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email
Subject: IMPORTANT!!! ORBS USERS PLEASE TAKE NOTE
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 22:30:50 -0000
Message-ID:
IMPORTANT!!!
IF YOU ARE CONFIGURED TO MAKE REFERENCES TO ANY ORBS.ORG `LIST' ZONE(S)
I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT YOU DISCONTINUE DOING SO IMMEDIATELY, IF NOT
SOONER. FAILURE TO DO SO MAY RESULT IN SERIOUS IMPARMENT OF YOUR
E-MAIL INFLOW.
This is a public service announcement for those sites that are still
configured to perform lookups against any or all of the following
former (and now defunct) ORBS zones:
inputs.orbs.org
outputs.orbs.org
relays.orbs.org
delayed-outputs.orbs.org
spamsources.orbs.org
spamsource-netblocks.orbs.org
manual.orbs.org
As a courtesy to Alan Brown (owner and operator of ORBS.ORG), I agreed
last year to allow one of my name servers (E-SCRUB.COM) to become one
of 11 name servers for the orbs.org zone. I agree to this because the
each of the `list' subdomains noted above was in fact a separate zone
of its own, separate and different from the base `orbs.org' zone, which
itself contained very few DNS records.
My agreement with Alan was ONLY to act as a secondary name server (one
of eleven) for the base orbs.org zone. Because of normal DNS client-side
caching, and because of the small number of DNS records involved, I knew
for certain at the time that having my name server be one of 11 secondaries
for the base orbs.org zone would involve very little expenditure of band-
width on my part.
The situation changed dramatically however with Alan's disabling of the
subzones mentioned above. (This occured sometime last month. I'm not
exactly sure of the date.) When disabling the `list' subzones, Alan
apparently just removed any mention of these subzones/subdomains from
the base orbs.org zone file.
Because of the way Alan disabled the former ORBS list zones, my name
server is now shouldering (at least) 1/11th of the total world-wide
DNS queries that are still being made against both the base orbs.org
zone and also against all of the former ORBS `list' subzones. This
may not sound like a lot, but in fact it DOES represent a substantial
and noticable drain on the small amount of bandwidth I have. I should
note also that when I briefly turned on query logging in my name server
recently, I found that over 2,000 sites world wide are still making
frequent and repeated references to the former ORBS list subzones,
presumably as they attempt to check each e-mail message coming into
their mail servers.
I simply do not have the kind of bandwidth necessary to support all of
this pointless and utterly wasteful traffic. I've asked Alan multiple
times to remove my name server from the list of authoratative name servers
for the orbs.org zone, and each time he has made up some new implausible
excuse. Alan's dog may indeed have eaten his homework, but his excuses
just aren't believable anymore. (He has had plenty of time to take care
of this. I first requested him to remove my server on June 7th, 2001,
and I have re-requested that he do that several times since. Each time
he has either failed to respond or else had presented me with some new
implausible excuse.)
I've considered various solutions to this problem, but none of them seem
particularly easy for me. I could certainly relocate my name server, called
E-SCRUB.COM, to a different IP address, but for all I know, the DNS query
traffic might just follow the name, rather than the IP address, so then I'd
be right back where I started. It would also be a major pain in the ass for
me to get an new IP for other reasons. I have already tried setting up
NS records in _my_ copy of the orbs.org zonefile (on my name server) for
all of the subzones mentioned above, and pointing all of those NS records
at 127.0.0.1 (local loopback address) but for reason I don't fully under-
stand, that hasn't stopped the DNS query flood to my name server either.
I'm sure that there are a number of other possible convoluted solutions to
this problem, e.g. creating a new `host' record in DNS (and with NSI) and
then re-jiggering all of the records for my many other domains so that the
primary name servers for those are listed as being the new `host', but this
seems like a lot more work than I should have to go to just because Alan
refuses to do the decent thing and because so many sites have been so
horribly
lax in removing references to the now long defunct ORBS list zones.
In light of all this, I've decided to just use a trivial and brute-force
approach to stopping all of this DNS query traffic from being sent to my
name server. As of 9 PM tonight (Pacific Daylight Time) my name server
will be configured to answer ALL `A' record queries regarding ANY name
within the orbs.org domain with an affirmative response and with the IP
address value `127.0.0.1'. Each such response will carry an extremely
long TTL, in order to insure that further queries regarding the same name
will be put off as long as possible into the indefinite future.
An exception will be made, of course, for `A' record queries relating to
`www.orbs.org', which my name server will contine to identify as being
located at 202.61.250.235.
The implications of my plan for sites still attempting to use the orbs.org
zones for e-mail filtering purposes should be evident. From 9 PM PDT
tonight
all such sites will begin to reject (at least) an estimated 1/11th of their
incoming e-mail, at random. The portion of incoming e-mail given this
treatment by these sites may in fact increase, over time, as I also intend
to delete all other NS (name server) records from my copy of the orbs.org
zone file, leaving only my server listed as being authoritative for this
zone. (I'm actually not sure what effects this will have as the root
server will still contain a completely list of all 11 current registered
name server for the zone.)
Complaints, flames, and lawsuit threats resulting from the DNS change that
I will make to name server this evening should be directed to Alan Brown,
whose new/current e-mail address seems to be ,
and/or to your own local mail administrator.
Finally, allow me to recommend to all mail administrators reading this that
tonight's change will provide you with what I believe will be a more than
compelling incentive to select some new and different source of open relays
data. At the present time, there are at least four such services available
to the general public.
Regards,
Ron Guilmette
P.S. I wish that I could recommend one of the four active open relays
listing
services above the others, but one of them refuses to accept automated sub-
missions, two of the others don't seem to even answer their e-mail, and the
final one has recently blacklisted my own non-open mail server, simply be-
cause I made the small mistake of manually replying to one of their own
auto-replies that was sent in response to a prior message that I had sent
them to nominate some open relays I knew about.
When and if a responsive and intelligently-run public open relays listing
service become available, I'll certainly be among the first to use it and to
recommend it.
----- End Included Message -----
-
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@postfix.org with content
(not subject): unsubscribe postfix-users
------ End of Forwarded Message
------ End of Forwarded Message
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 12 18:20:19 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id SAA16642; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:04:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [209.239.169.200])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C41F617E8B
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [209.239.169.205] (a205.plaidworks.com [209.239.169.205])
by plaidworks.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f6D0tff17810
for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 17:55:41 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:04:27 -0700
Subject: FW: [OT] FW: MAPS Subscription Policy Changes
From: Chuq Von Rospach
To:
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <20010713001830.53A1D4312@jimsun.LinxNet.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
This came in after my previous comments on MAPS. FWIW.
------ Forwarded Message
From: jseymour@LinxNet.com (Jim Seymour)
Reply-To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 20:18:30 -0400 (EDT)
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: [OT] FW: MAPS Subscription Policy Changes
Sorry for the 2nd off-topic forward from news.admin.net-abuse.email in
one afternoon, but I figured this was pretty important to most mail
admins too...
----- Begin Included Message -----
From: Margie
Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email
Subject: MAPS Subscription Policy Changes
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:45:11 -0700
Message-ID:
Effective Midnight 7/31/2001, all non-subscription access to MAPS
services will cease. Anyone wishing to transfer or query MAPS data
must have a signed contract with MAPS, and have access enabled in our
ACL. There are several reasons for this change:
1) The data in the MAPS files belongs to MAPS and is copyrighted.
MAPS, RBL, RBL+, DUL and RSS are all service marks of MAPS. MAPS must
have the ability to protect its assets from unauthorized use or
disclosure by third parties.
2) As MAPS popularity grew, the demand on our resources grew. We have
continually upgraded systems, software, and added servers where
necessary. The end result is our systems and connectivity are
sufficient enough that providers have no incentive to pay for zone
transfer subscriptions. When MAPS began to offer paid subscriptions,
we believed that allowing access based on the ability to pay would
allow the largest percentage of the net to access the services, while
permitting MAPS to sustain itself with subscriptions from the large
users of the services. What we have found instead is that we are our
own worst "competition".
3) The economic conditions in the industry have hit everyone,
including MAPS. MAPS' purpose is to stop spam on the internet. That
purpose can only be achieved as long as MAPS can maintain itself as a
corporation. Like any corporation, that takes income. There is very
little debate about the effectiveness of the MAPS lists. This
effectiveness saves its users time, bandwidth and other resources as
well as giving them an added value to their customers by reducing the
amount of spam the customer sees in their inbox. MAPS can simply no
longer afford to foot the bill for the bulk of the internet community.
It is not our intent to put the use of the MAPS lists out of reach of
the individual or hobby site. We will still offer some reduced fee or
free query contracts under limited circumstances.
As usual, please direct requests for contracts to
subscription-request@mail-abuse.org, questions and comments to
margie@mail-abuse.org and flames to dev/null. ;)
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Margie Arbon Mail Abuse Prevention System, LLC
Manager, Market and Business Development
margie@mail-abuse.org http://mail-abuse.org
----- End Included Message -----
-
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@postfix.org with content
(not subject): unsubscribe postfix-users
------ End of Forwarded Message
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 26 05:13:56 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id EAA01144; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 04:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.50])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74B6A17E8B
for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 04:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hppav ([12.79.244.242]) by mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net
(InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP
id <20010726115828.NCTB5127.mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net@hppav>
for ;
Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:58:28 +0000
Message-ID: <002d01c115ca$31f4fa00$0101a8c0@hppav>
From: "larry lunt"
To: "GreatCirclePost"
Subject: Problem
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 07:52:01 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I have a 220 person list. I have one member who never receives a message. He
did receive the automated welcome message in the beginning. I'm sure he is
subscribed. it is a major domo list.
Any ideas on what the problem might be? He uses "Outlook".
Larry
From list-managers-owner Thu Jul 26 07:14:31 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id HAA02769; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 07:06:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.rev.net (server02.rev.net [206.67.68.98])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55AE517ED5
for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 07:05:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from admin3 (bernie.rev.net [63.148.93.15] (may be forged))
by mail.rev.net (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f6QE5tD18106
for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:05:55 -0400
Message-Id: <200107261405.f6QE5tD18106@mail.rev.net>
From: "Bernie Cosell"
Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:05:55 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Problem
Reply-To: bernie@fantasyfarm.com
In-reply-to: <002d01c115ca$31f4fa00$0101a8c0@hppav>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b)
X-Archived: msg.996156355.uXTr2B@server02.rev.net
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On 26 Jul 01, at 7:52, larry lunt wrote:
> I have a 220 person list. I have one member who never receives a message. He
> did receive the automated welcome message in the beginning. I'm sure he is
> subscribed. it is a major domo list.
What I'd do first is check the server's mail logs to confirm that it
is trying to send email to him.
> Any ideas on what the problem might be? He uses "Outlook".
There are a lot of reasons --- in the interim someone may have
interposed a 'spam filter' that is [erroneously] nailing your list,
or he could have a mailbox-routing problem and the mail is ending up
in some mailbox that he never checks [or can't check] any more...
Who can tell? I think a critical first-step is to verify that your
system is attempting to *deliver* the message to him. It could be
just a broken mail address, but due to a misconfigure of his server
the error message is going back to the author rather than to you [and
so you can't see the bounces]
Once you've verified that you are actually attempting to deliver a
message on his behalf [and you'll see "sent" in your mailer log to
demonstrate conclusively that *some* server has accepted email for
the person], you can go the next step and check with the 'postmaster'
at the next mail-handler in the pipe [the one to which you passed the
message] --- give the postmaster the details of the handoff and the
message ID and ask the postmaster "what did YOUR system do with this
message". Eventually you'll find out where the mail is ending up or
which server is bouncing it [and to where].
/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep ; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 02:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ruby ([66.21.198.7]) by imf16bis.bellsouth.net
(InterMail vM.5.01.01.01 201-252-104) with ESMTP
id <20010727090547.CHQC3653.imf16bis.bellsouth.net@ruby>
for ;
Fri, 27 Jul 2001 05:05:47 -0400
Message-Id: <4.2.2.20010727051200.00bed570@danebytes.com>
X-Sender: ruby@danebytes.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 05:14:29 -0400
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Ruby
Subject: Another problem
In-Reply-To: <200107270800.BAA14475@honor.greatcircle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I too, have a 200+ member list.
Most AOL members can READ but not respond.
Any suggestions so that i can fix them ?
Thanks !
Ruby
p.s. I have already sent them all the info y'all
posted before on how to set their mail to plain text.
They all think i am doing something wrong.
From list-managers-owner Sat Jul 28 07:18:27 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id GAA07181; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 06:56:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF68117E8E
for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 06:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.5] (isdn_dev [160.43.47.9])
by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6SDu6o49302
for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:56:07 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:57:25 -0400
From: Tom Neff
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Another problem
Message-ID: <4176799984.996314245@[192.168.0.5]>
In-Reply-To: <200107280800.BAA00824@honor.greatcircle.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Ruby wrote:
> I too, have a 200+ member list.
> Most AOL members can READ but not respond.
>
> Any suggestions so that i can fix them ?
>
> Thanks !
> Ruby
>
> p.s. I have already sent them all the info y'all
> posted before on how to set their mail to plain text.
> They all think i am doing something wrong.
In my experience you can lecture and educate AOL members on the plain text
thing until you're blue in the face and the problem won't go away, because
new people are always arriving and users in general aren't "techy" enough
to dodge the considerable roadblocks AOL throws nowadays.
The only solution that works over the long haul is to filter postings
through a 'demime' stage if you have sufficient control over your list
hosting to allow this. Demime is a perl script that can be placed in an
alias 'pipe' - it strips out attachments and renders even HTML-only
messages into plain text. Its latest version is always available at
http://scifi.squawk.com/demime.html
and, oh yeah, it protects your lists from these attached-file worms that
have been going around lately.
In the interests of full disclosure I should point out that I am a well
known user-coddler and envelope-munger around here. There is an opposing
school of thought that believes that "every byte is sacred" and that filter
stages are sacrilege, AND that users ought to be expected to jump through
any damn technical hoop in the book or fuggem, they're unworthy -- and you
may hear from these folks too.
From list-managers-owner Sun Jul 29 21:29:37 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id VAA27545; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 21:00:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tom.iecc.com (tom.iecc.com [208.31.42.38])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D25C717EC3
for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 21:00:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 20003 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 00:00:49 -0400
Received: (ofmipd 208.31.42.39); 30 Jul 2001 04:00:27 -0000
Date: 30 Jul 2001 00:00:49 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "John R Levine"
To: "Tom Neff"
Cc: "List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM"
Subject: Re: Another problem
In-Reply-To: <4176799984.996314245@[192.168.0.5]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> > Most AOL members can READ but not respond.
> > p.s. I have already sent them all the info y'all
> > posted before on how to set their mail to plain text.
> > They all think i am doing something wrong.
With AOL 6.0, it is close to impossible to send plain text messages, even
if you are considerably more technically sophisticated than the average
AOL user. I'm not sure I could do it consistently.
I second the suggestion to use demime. It's made a great deal of trouble
go away with negligible downside.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner
Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47
From list-managers-owner Mon Jul 30 05:43:46 2001
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-980720-1) id FAA06764; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 05:38:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from www.lofcom.com (unknown [216.105.35.108])
by honor.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A7EF17EAE
for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 05:38:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [208.165.39.202] (ip202.39.blaz.blazenet.net [208.165.39.202])
by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA16520;
Mon, 30 Jul 2001 08:37:53 -0400
X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com
X-Envelope-To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:
References: <4176799984.996314245@[192.168.0.5]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 08:35:38 -0400
To: "John R Levine" , "Tom Neff"
From: Charlie Summers
Subject: Re: Another problem
Cc: "List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 12:00 AM -0400 7/30/01, John R Levine is rumored to have typed:
> With AOL 6.0, it is close to impossible to send plain text messages, even
> if you are considerably more technically sophisticated than the average
> AOL user. I'm not sure I could do it consistently.
It's easy - use the web interface to mail at http://www.aol.com/ . Check
this...the AOL mailer sends HTML, and the web interface sends plain text. Go
figure.
Charlie